Intel Core i7-3770K vs Intel Core i7-4860HQ Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits decisively by test family. The Intel Core i7-3770K wins six of the eight recorded comparisons, all in Cinebench workloads, while the Intel Core i7-4860HQ takes two wins in Geekbench with substantial margins. The average benchmark score favors the 4860HQ at 1720 versus 1688 for the 3770K, a gap of roughly 1.9%, but that aggregate hides the lopsided nature of individual tests.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 3770K scores 558 against 533 for the 4860HQ, a 4.5% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similar: 78 versus 75, a 3.8% edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the 3770K leads multi-core with 2327 over 2224 (4.4% ahead) and single-core with 328 over 313 (4.6% ahead). Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multi-core 5542 versus 5297 (4.4% ahead), single-core 782 versus 747 (4.5% ahead). These are consistent, narrow margins across every Cinebench iteration, indicating a stable performance advantage for the desktop part in rendering-style workloads.

The Geekbench results flip the picture entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the 4860HQ scores 3527 against 3027 for the 3770K, a 16.5% lead. The single-core Geekbench test shows an even larger gap: 1045 versus 860, a 21.5% advantage for the mobile chip. These are not marginal differences; the 4860HQ outperforms the 3770K by more than a fifth in single-core Geekbench, a striking reversal from the Cinebench results.

Interpreting the split requires attention to what each test measures. Cinebench leans on sustained multi-threaded and single-threaded CPU rendering, while Geekbench incorporates a broader mix of integer, floating-point, and memory patterns. The recorded data indicates the 3770K holds a steady 4% to 5% edge in Cinebench, but the 4860HQ dominates Geekbench by double-digit percentages. For a user prioritizing Geekbench-style workloads, the 4860HQ is clearly the stronger part. For Cinebench-style rendering, the 3770K is consistently ahead despite its lower average score.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward choice based on workload profile. The Intel Core i7-3770K wins six of eight head-to-head benchmarks, making it the default pick for users whose primary applications resemble Cinebench: multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, and single-threaded CPU tasks where the 4% to 5% margins accumulate. Its percentile ranking of 40 versus 41 for the 4860HQ is nearly identical, but the win count is decisive.

The Intel Core i7-4860HQ, however, is the superior part in Geekbench-derived workloads. Its 16.5% multi-core and 21.5% single-core leads are far larger than any Cinebench gap, suggesting that in general-purpose computing tasks, productivity suites, and mixed integer workloads, the 4860HQ offers a real performance advantage. The average benchmark score of 1720 versus 1688 confirms this: the 4860HQ is the higher-scoring chip overall.

For a desktop user with an unlocked multiplier on the 3770K, the Cinebench wins point to that chip for rendering-focused builds. For a mobile user or anyone running Geekbench-heavy applications, the 4860HQ delivers better measured performance. The 3770K also carries a launch MSRP of $313, which can be stated once as a historical reference point. Neither part is in production, so the choice is about matching existing hardware to workload.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures. The Core i7-4860HQ is built on Haswell, with the codename Crystalwell, while the Core i7-3770K uses Ivy Bridge, sharing its codename with the architecture. Both are manufactured on a 22 nm process node at Intel's foundry, and both pack 1,400 million transistors. The die sizes differ notably: the 4860HQ measures 264 mm², while the 3770K is significantly smaller at 160 mm², reflecting the integrated graphics and additional logic in the mobile part.

Cache hierarchies are similar but not identical. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. The L3 cache differs: the 4860HQ has 6 MB shared, while the 3770K has 8 MB shared, a 2 MB advantage for the desktop chip. The 4860HQ's integrated graphics is Intel HD 5200, a higher-tier iGPU compared to the 3770K's Intel HD 4000. The 4860HQ is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1364, while the 3770K is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1155.

The 3770K has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the 4860HQ is locked. The release dates are separated by roughly 21 months: the 3770K launched in April 2012, the 4860HQ in January 2014. Both are end-of-life products. The process node being identical means the architectural differences come from design choices rather than manufacturing improvements.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical: 4 cores and 8 threads for both. Base clocks differ substantially, with the 3770K at 3.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz for the 4860HQ, a 1.1 GHz gap. Boost clocks are closer: 3.90 GHz for the 3770K and 3.60 GHz for the 4860HQ, a 0.3 GHz difference. The thermal design power favors the mobile part at 47 W versus 77 W for the desktop chip, a 30 W difference that reflects the 4860HQ's lower voltage and mobile orientation.

Memory support is identical on paper: both use DDR3 with dual-channel buses and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, and neither supports ECC memory. The 3770K has an unlocked multiplier, as noted, and the 4860HQ does not. The 4860HQ uses the BGA 1364 socket, while the 3770K uses Socket 1155. The 3770K has a launch MSRP of $313; the 4860HQ has no recorded launch MSRP. Part numbers differ: SR1BP for the 4860HQ, SR0PL for the 3770K.

The cache difference is the only significant spec gap beyond clocks and TDP: 8 MB L3 for the 3770K versus 6 MB for the 4860HQ. The smaller die size for the 3770K (160 mm² versus 264 mm²) is notable given the same transistor count, indicating the Haswell part packs more functionality per transistor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-4860HQ has an average benchmark score of 1720, while the Intel Core i7-3770K scores 1688, a difference of 32 points.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmarks does each chip win?

A: The 3770K wins six of eight tests, all in Cinebench, while the 4860HQ wins two tests, both in Geekbench.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench single-core, where the 4860HQ scores 1045 versus 860 for the 3770K, a 21.5% advantage.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The 4860HQ has a TDP of 47 W, while the 3770K has a TDP of 77 W.

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: The 3770K has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 4860HQ has 6 MB.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, only the 3770K has an unlocked multiplier; the 4860HQ is locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3770K wins in all Cinebench scenarios. The data shows a 4.5% lead in R15 multi-core, 3.8% in R15 single-core, 4.4% in R20 multi-core, 4.6% in R20 single-core, 4.4% in R23 multi-core, and 4.5% in R23 single-core. These margins are consistent and repeatable across three generations of the Cinebench test. Users running rendering engines, 3D modeling software, or CPU-based video encoding that scales with Cinebench scores should favor the 3770K. Its higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz and larger 8 MB L3 cache likely contribute to this edge, though the data does not isolate cause.

The Intel Core i7-4860HQ wins decisively in Geekbench. The 16.5% multi-core lead (3527 versus 3027) and 21.5% single-core lead (1045 versus 860) are the largest margins in the entire comparison. This suggests the Haswell architecture handles Geekbench's mixed workload patterns more efficiently, despite lower clock speeds and a smaller L3 cache. For general productivity, web browsing, office suites, and applications that exercise diverse instruction patterns, the 4860HQ is the better performer. Its lower 47 W TDP also makes it the only reasonable choice for mobile platforms given the BGA 1364 socket.

The 3770K additionally benefits from an unlocked multiplier, which the data records but does not quantify in benchmark terms. Users with overclocking capability on Socket 1155 could potentially extend its Cinebench lead further. The 4860HQ offers no such headroom but compensates with superior Geekbench results out of the box. The 3770K's launch MSRP of $313 provides a historical price reference, though neither part is currently in production.

For a desktop workstation focused on rendering, the 3770K is the clear pick based on six consecutive Cinebench wins. For a mobile system or a desktop workload dominated by Geekbench-style tasks, the 4860HQ's double-digit advantages make it the stronger option. The average score gap (1720 versus 1688) favors the 4860HQ, but the win count favors the 3770K, so the final decision rests entirely on which benchmark family matches the user's applications.